BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON
BUSINESS, PROFESSIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Senator Jerry Hill, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular
Bill No: SB 1331 Hearing Date: April 18,
2016
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Author: |Pavley |
|----------+------------------------------------------------------|
|Version: |April 11, 2016 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
|Urgency: |No |Fiscal: |Yes |
----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Consultant|Bill Gage |
|: | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: State Board of Guide Dogs for the Blind: membership:
out-of-state schools: followup services
SUMMARY:
Changes the composition of the State Board of Guide Dogs for
the Blind (Board); allows for out-of-state guide dog instructors
to come into California to provide follow-up services without
having to obtain a license from the Board but only when they
notify the Board that they will be providing the follow-up
services and submit themselves to the jurisdiction of the Board;
and requires the Board to provide a factsheet as specified on
its website and to schools who provide guide dog training and to
those receiving the training.
Existing law:
1) Establishes within the Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA) a
State Board of Guide Dogs for the Blind (Board) which
consists of 7 members appointed by the Governor and requires
that 2 of the Board members be persons who are blind or
visually impaired who use guide dogs. (Business and
Professions Code (BPC) § 7200)
2) Provides that the Board shall have exclusive authority in
this state to issue licenses for the instruction of persons
who are blind or visually impaired in the use of guide dogs
and for the training of guide dogs for use by persons who are
blind or visually impaired, and provides that the Board shall
SB 1331 (Pavley) Page 2
of ?
also have exclusive authority in this state to issue licenses
to operate schools for the training of guide dogs and the
instruction of persons who are blind or visually impaired in
the use of guide dogs.
(BPC § 7200.5)
This bill:
1) Requires that at least 3 members of the Board be either blind
or visually impaired instead of just 2 members and would
require that of these 3 Board members, that one
representative be from each of the two major consumer
organizations representing Californians who are blind or
visually impaired, and that the Governor in making these
appointments shall consider recommendations from these
organizations.
2) Provides that notwithstanding any other law, whenever an
individual has received training or instruction from a school
outside of this sate that is certified by the International
Guide Dog Federation or a successor entity, as determined by
the Board, personnel from that school may provide, in this
state, any follow-up service to that individual with respect
to the specific guide dog for whom the training or
instruction was originally provided outside of this state
3) Requires the personnel providing the followup services,
within 5 days of arriving in this state, to notify the Board
of their intent to provide these services and would authorize
the Board to refuse to allow personnel who have committed
certain acts for which the Board could suspend or revoke a
license to provide those services, and would place those
personnel under the disciplinary jurisdiction of the Board
while they provide those services
4) Requires the Board, until January 1, 2018, to prepare a
factsheet that shall provide a description of the purposes
served by the Board, a description of the Board's role in
assisting guide dog users who are victims of alleged guide
dog discrimination, and a description of the Board's
arbitration procedure as described in Section 7215.6 of the
BPC. Provides that the Board shall post the factsheet on its
Internet Web site and provide copies to each licensed guide
dog school by the Board and that each school shall provide a
SB 1331 (Pavley) Page 3
of ?
copy of the factsheet to every student receiving training
from the school.
FISCAL
EFFECT: Unknown. This bill has been keyed "fiscal" by
Legislative Counsel.
COMMENTS:
1. Purpose. This measure is sponsored by the California Council
of the Blind . According to the Author, existing law
pertaining to the Board is not adequate to protect the needs
of persons who are blind and visually impaired. This bill
seeks to improve services by focusing on three areas in need
of reform:
Board Composition . As stated by the Author,
"Currently, the composition of the Board of Guide Dogs
for the Blind does not adequately understand the needs
and challenges of the blind and visually impaired. Of
the seven members on the Board, only two are required to
be guide dog handlers. Also, there is not adequate
representation from the two consumer advocacy
organizations whose central mission is to help the blind
gain full independence and equality of opportunity in all
walks of life. This can create a situation where a
majority of board members lack the knowledge to make the
best decisions concerning the administration of the
board's authority."
Follow-up Services from Out-of-State Schools . The
Author further explains that in recent years, the Board
has interpreted its authority as requiring an out-of
state school that has provided training to a California
resident at the school, to obtain a license from the
Board for any staff to come into California for the sole
purpose of providing follow-up services to the student
with respect to the dog for which the original training
was received out-of state. This has taken guide dog
owners by surprise throughout the state. For decades,
out-of-state schools have been allowed to provide
follow-up care and there have been no adverse incidents
on record in terms of this assistance.
SB 1331 (Pavley) Page 4
of ?
Given that the Board is now requiring out- of- state
schools to obtain licensure in California for this
limited time period, there is a growing backlash from
out-of- state schools, as stated by the Author. One
school in New Jersey has already been fined and sent a
cease and desist letter. They are no longer providing
services in California leaving guide dog owners who
received original training from this school with no
follow-up assistance whatsoever. While the Board has
been unable to identify any instance of objectionable
care rendered by a non-state school relating to follow-up
care, they believe follow-up care is "instruction" and
any instruction in this state must be licensed. The
California Council for the Blind states that follow-up
service is not "basic instruction," which was provided
originally at the school. This is simply follow-up
assistance to help the dog after he has graduated from
the school and there should not burdensome licensing
requirements to assist in these limited circumstances.
No other state in the nation requires the licensure of
guide dogs schools or instructors.
This measure, as pointed out by the Author, is intended to
allow follow-up assistance in very limited circumstances.
"This issue is very important to the blind and visually
impaired for many reasons. Schools have very different
philosophies in terms of training. It is important to
have a continuum of care with the original school because
they know and understand the guide dog owner and guide
dog which received comprehensive training at their school
and can appropriately intervene in a timely fashion."
Guide Dog Board Fact Sheet . As further explained by
the Author, guide dog handlers are often unaware of the
authority of the Board, and even those who have some
knowledge about the Board are unclear as to its powers
and duties. While there is some information available
on the Board's website, it remains challenging for the
blind and visually impaired to access the information.
Many of the visually impaired have no computer access.
Others that do have computer access do not have good web
searching skills and the website is very difficult to
navigate. It would be beneficial, the Author believes,
SB 1331 (Pavley) Page 5
of ?
to have all the required information in one document - a
fact sheet - similar to what is offered by other boards
and departments. The fact sheet should be required to be
handed out to all graduates at guide dog training schools
so the visually impaired do not have to worry about
computer access. The guide dogs schools are supportive
of making this information available. A fact sheet will
also be helpful to the Board because it will clarify what
the Board can and cannot do, so that consumers do not
have unrealistic expectations. Many questions involving
services for the blind, as indicated by the Author, have
to be referred to the Americans With Disabilities
Information Assistance Call Line because their questions
are outside of the jurisdiction of the Board.
1. Background. The Board was established in January 1, 1948 to
ensure that blind persons receive well-trained guide dogs, to
confirm that blind persons are thoroughly trained to be
effective and safe guide dog users, and to assure donors to
guide dog charities that their donations will be used for the
intended charitable purpose. The Board's mission, as stated
in the Board's 2010-2014 Strategic Plan is as follows:
"To ensure the quality of the guide dog industry by protecting,
promoting, and educating guide dog users, instructors,
schools, and the public in order to enhance the lives of
blind or visually impaired individuals."
The Board licenses guide dog schools, guide dog instructors, and
fundraising programs to open new guide dog schools. The
Board inspects all schools, requires new active guide dog
instructors to take a legally defensible written and
practical examination, and requires instructors to submit
proof of eight hours of continuing education each year to
remain licensed. California is the only state that has such
a regulatory program.
In fiscal year 2011/12 the Board had a license base of 109
active guide dog instructors and 3 inactive guide dog
instructors. The Board also oversees 3 guide dog schools
located throughout California. The Board has seven members,
one of whom represents the Director of the Department of
Rehabilitation. The other six are Governor's appointees, two
of whom must be blind persons who use guide dogs.
SB 1331 (Pavley) Page 6
of ?
2. Arguments in Support. The California Council of the Blind
(CCB) is in support of this measure. In regards to the
change in composition of the Board, CCB believes that adding
an additional dog care handler to the Board will help ensure
that the board contains sufficient number of members who have
the requisite knowledge about guide dog issues to make the
best possibly policy determinations in matters that come
before the Board. Providing a factsheet and including it on
its Board website along with providing to guide dog schools
and to their students will ensure that guide dog handlers and
others interested in the use of guide dogs will continue to
have access to information about the Board.
Finally, the bill addresses a change in the Board's
interpretation of its own authority. "After decades of not
applying the law in this manner, the Board has recently
decided that it is a violation of law for an out-of-state
school to send in a staff member to provide follow-up
instruction to a resident of California who received training
with the guide dog at the out-of-state school site, unless
the staff member receives a California license. This bill
would provide that, with respect to an out-of-state school
certified by the International Guide Dog Federation, a staff
member of that school could come into California without a
license from the Board solely to provide follow-up
instruction for the guide dog handler who obtained his or her
dog at the out-of-state school. CCB argues that it is not
the intent of this bill to undermine the state licensing
requirements, but merely to enable Californians who have
chosen an out-of-state school and who need follow-up
instruction, often in emergency situations such as the dog
having been attacked or been in an accident, to obtain that
service." Providing the Board with notice by the
out-of-state staff person who will be providing the follow-up
service and submitting themselves to the Board's oversight
and jurisdiction will assure that the Board has the authority
to act if a consumer is adversely impacted by an out-of-state
school providing such services.
The International Guide Dog Federation (IGDF) is also in support
of this measure and believes that by requiring that the
out-of-state school, that is providing one of its staff
persons for follow-up services, be from a school that is
SB 1331 (Pavley) Page 7
of ?
accredited by the IGDF will assure they will be meeting the
stringent standards of accreditation by IGDF and will provide
for the safe, unrestricted, independent mobility of guide
dogs for all people who are blind or partially sighted for
one of their accredited member organizations. (The IGDF
currently has 90 member organizations across 28 different
countries. Some of these countries have just one IGDF
members, while others have up to 12. Recent information
provided by IGDF shows that there are 20,519 guide dogs
working in 2014 that came from IGDF member organizations. Of
this number 3,215 were new partnerships starting out for the
first time.)
SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION:
Support:
California Council of the Blind (Sponsor)
International Guide Dog Federation
Guide Dogs for the Blind
Opposition:
State Board of Guide Dogs for the Blind
-- END --